ITAT Rajkot Judgments — July 2021

The Tribunal allowed the assessee's appeal based on the principle of parity and consistency. The department had accepted cash deposits as genuine in the cases of other partners of the firm, leading to no adverse action against them.

The Tribunal held that the penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) was not sustainable due to technical defects in the assessment proceedings, specifically regarding the approval under Section 153D and the lack of specific notice under Section 274. The technical issues were found to be decisive.

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) should have considered the additional evidence submitted by the assessee, as her absence was due to health reasons. The failure to consider this evidence amounted to a miscarriage of justice.